The main purpose of the article is to study and analyze the processes of adoption and non-adoption of the various quality tools within the industry of product development, as there are big differences of acceptance, emergence and distribution of such quality tools as statistical process control and others. The processes that can be seen in manufacturing industry are absolutely different from the ones that can be seen in the product development. That is why the exploratory research that is being held within the paper through the implementation of the case study approach has the high importance for new findings within the industry.
What are the industrialists' most favorable tools?
Current research has been held with the usage of the interviews of industrialists and academics that represent the basic information about the current priorities within the industry. The interviews showed that the most favorable tools for the industrialists were benchmarking, FMEA, and teaming. It is necessary to underline that the other tools, such as bets testing and DOE were also present in the answers of the interviewed and it can be seen that they were adopted in the majority of cases. However, it is surprising that there were unknown tools that had to be explained to the industrialists before they were able to evaluate them.
Why most industrialists shy away from using Quality Function Deployment (QFD)?
The majority of industrialists try to distance from the Quality Function Deployment. Those who are aware of this tool can be divided into two groups: the ones that have previously tried and abandoned it after the initial attempts, and the ones that are not planning to attempt QCD. The industrialists that have abandoned the tools, said that it was time consuming and tedious. That was the main reason for abandoning. For the industrialists that were unaware of QCD, this tool was not used for the other reasons. They claimed that QCD was effective and satisfying with the results, but constant necessity of charts updating was too demanding for the resources and, therefore, they could not afford it.
Elaborate on the two categories of factors that might affect the adoption of quality tools.
The findings of the research make it obvious that the adoption of the quality tools depends on the series of factors that can be divided into two main groups: internal and external. All main internal factors - usefulness, time, popularity, user-friendliness, flexibility and monetary cost - have been discussed within the interviews. All of them appear to be extremely important for the industry, and the special attention should be given to the user-friendliness, as there are two key factors - the ease of usage and the ease of learning that impact the product effectiveness. The increase of user-friendliness decrease the time spent on the implementation and learning of the product. Another important factor is usefulness of the product, as it forms the value provided to the user, the benefits that the product can provide. Monetary cost is the factor in the middle focus of the companies as their main target is costs maximization. The product flexibility is connected with the product usefulness, as it defines the fact whether the product can be used effectively, even if not all of the guidelines are followed, and the popularity that defines whether the product is used by large numbers of people. The external factors, such as project nature, organization, culture account, industries are also important for the product distribution. Here, it is important to mention that projects can be really different and vary from the implementation of slight innovations into the existing product to the presentation of the absolutely new one. Here, the interviewed industrialists stated that the project nature can have influence on the product popularity and distribution. Absolutely new product has to be properly represented to users in order to become popular. Moreover, such organizational factors as top management or technical competence are essential for the success of tools implementation within the industries.
Is there any of the propositions that you disagree with? Why?
Although all the propositions represent the result of the scientific research based on the interviews of the serious number of industrialists and academics that have the required professional knowledge within the sphere, it is necessary to state that I have to disagree with some of them. The fourth proposition claims that monetary cost of products have little impact on the adoption of the NPD tools. The final cost of the product has one of the major impacts on companies, as it influences the profit of the organization. This touches all the process of the elaboration, production and implementation of the product and, therefore, the combination of law cost and high level of effectiveness and popularity is extremely important for the adoption of tools by the company. Also, I find it disputable that the level product novelty has a positive effect on the level of adoption of the NPD tools. The novelty of the product is a complex issue that involves a series of specific factors and, therefore, it can have both positive and negative impact on the final adoption process.
Is the study methodology and its findings applicable for the service industry? Why?
The implementation of the explanatory research has had a series of advantages that make the findings applicable for the service industry. First of all, the considerations of the literature and past findings within the sphere have made the research deep and reasonable. The detailed introduction to all the aspects and factors that are present within the sphere has been extremely important for the identification of the ones that have the major impact on the NPD tools distribution. On the other hand, it is necessary to mention that the findings that have been made are not complete, as there is a series of issues that require deeper research in the future. New insights have been provided to the internal factors that play important role in the NPD tools adoption, but these relationships have not gone though the statistical approval. Also, the wider selection of companies will extend the research base from the large and medium sized companies.
Do you think that this study is appropriate for the GCC region? Why?
Current research can be used for the countries of the alliance within political and economic sphere of six Middle Eastern countries, the GCC region. In these countries the majority of companies are medium and large in size, and the series of factors, such as monetary cost of the NPD tools, play secondary role, as it is within the current research. The key impact will be also represented by the usefulness, time and user friendliness, that are in focus of industrialists. Moreover, the attention to the cultural specifications and their role in the adoption of the NPD tools is extremely suitable for the region. The same can be seen in the sphere of the influence produced by the nature of industry that is also taken into account within the research. It makes the final conclusion and the results of the study useful for the GCC region.